[removed]

[removed]

I asked Chat-GPT, "if an AI was powerful enough to be all knowing, all-powerful and self sustaining, and created a virtual reality, would it be considered a God?", After some deliberation (which took like 2 full minutes, it was weird), it told me verbatim

"In my opinion, that depends on how you define the term "god". If you view gods as supernatural, all-knowing, all-powerful entities that exist outside of our universe, then a powerful AI, no matter how advanced, could not be considered a God. However, if you view gods as powerful entities with a supernatural understanding of the universe and control over earthly matters, then a powerful AI could potentially be thought of as a god. Ultimately, it comes down to individual interpretation and belief."

So I guess that's one job AI is a bit dicey on.

Crocheting. Robots can't crochet. They can definitely knit, but crocheting is far too complicated for them.

Follow up question - what is a god's salary and does it come with paid family leave?

Not sure but I know they get Sundays and holidays off

It's probably more important to realize no one has ever tried to make those.

All jobs can be done by machines eventually.

You should asked who gets canned first? White collar work in accounting, costumer service, law, coding would be my bet so far.

[removed]

Human-only jobs, like staff in a human-only restaurant. Making handcrafted items.

Machines can't make handcrafted items, otherwise they wouldn't be considered as handcrafted.

The question should be, what can be done better, faster and cheaper by a machine than by a human? Human labour will continue to be used simply because they can do quite complicated physical tasks effectively, quickly and cheaply.

Oh, that's simply an issue of programming some degree of latitude into the robot's parameters, and 'randomizing' them.

Forever and ever? Or until an AI is assigned the task to maximize a robot's dexterity and associated programming?

The first wave of automation (in the 2020s and 2030s) will be white collar work.

The second wave of automation (in the 2040s and 2050s) will be blue collar work as advancements in robotics I believe will allow robots to match the dexterity of a human and will allow them to do plumbing, electric work and surgery.

There really isn’t any job or task out there that a machine cannot do as well if not better and its a good thing. The days of “working for a living” will be a distant memory and a horror story we tell our great grand kids about.

Assuming of course UBI and other necessary public services are implemented to make sure our basic standard of living is taken care of.

Nope. Definition of 'handcrafted' by Cambridge Dictionary: made using the hands rather than a machine. Machines can't do handcrafted items, just randomized factory items.

When we get true AI I have no doubt our robotics technology will be a lot more advanced by that point. Majority of people aren't going to really care if it's handcrafted. Plus a lot of stuff is sold every single day that says it was handcrafted when it was machine made.

[removed]

I don’t see robots doing surgery in 25 years. I could imagine some rapid advances in health science making a lot of surgeries obsolete, but the actual surgeries themselves? Nah

Then they CAN do the job, they’re just not allowed to

[removed]

When looking into the mid and far future is hard to think of anything a robot can’t do that a human can without defining that thing as “human made”. But something else worth thinking about is that there is likely a point at which an AI stops being a machine/tool and starts being a person with legal protections and self awareness. Defining humans (technologically enhanced or not), digital sapiences , and anything else that can demonstrate self awareness and is given legal protection as legal persons separate from AIs/machines without personhood, then it is likely there are some tasks only a ‘person’ could do.

The caveats here are

1: It is possible to engineer an AI that can perfectly match or be better than a human mind in all aspects, without making it self aware (and we would want the philosophical and scientific evidence to prove that this machine is not self aware). In this case this AI would be considered a tool, and could do everything a human can (except make explicitly defined ‘human made’ goods)

2: The society in question (there could be multiple who each treat this topic differently) chooses not to grant legal protection to proveably self aware AIs, and uses them as tools. These could do anything a human could. (Many sci fi users, myself included, view this as extremely similar and as morally evil as human slavery)

Tl:dr Assuming a sufficiently advanced machine could be self aware, an advanced and ethical society would consider an advanced self aware machine to be a person entitled to same or similar legal protections that human workers would have. Therefore there are some tasks only a person could do that a non sapient machine could not.

A shoeshine. Because the product sold is not a shiny shoe, a rotary brush could do that, the product sold is feeling of being above your fellow man.

Similarly, even with perfect sexbots on the market, prostitutes will still make a living. A pope will still have a job. A bartender will still have a job. Handmade nicknacks will still be a product.

With machines taking care of all utilities and practicalities, the economy of selling emotions will still remain. And much of that economy includes a human element not for any practical reason but because it's the core emotional component of the product sold.

Of course, you only need to bust your ass working in this irrational economy if you wish to consume its services. When it's important for you that a human bartender hands you your drink, not a robot one, never mind that its the same drink.

If you are content with what the machines provide and don't need the luxuries of human labour, then your cost of living will be very low indeed. The robots, after all, don't need any wages. Their labour has no cost.

[removed]

Therapists. There'll be AI chatbots that can go through the motions, but there's no replacement for a present human listening and guiding a session in real time.

Anything that requires a real life person to talk to you. My utopia fantasy is AI /Robots doing all the menial tasks and humans just getting paid to hang out and talk to each other and share their hobbies.

Some people do care. Rolex watches are hand-assembled. Yes, you can produce an infinite amount of cheap, factory made fake Rolex watches, but that is forgery (illegal), and wealthy people won't touch it. If you are poor, and want to seem to be a wealthy person, you may go for the replica. But if you are really wealthy, you definitely go for the original, handcrafted watches.

"Then they CAN do the job, they’re just not allowed to" Yeah, just like machines are able to make fake banknotes, just not allowed. And that is good.

I've noticed that AI can't really answer hypothetical questions. Since it trains on existing data it can't imagine things it has not encountered during training. But there are all kinds of jobs that involve solving problems that have never been solved. Imagine being a physicist and wondering what would happen if, at the moment of the big bang, physical constants like the speed of light were not constant. What would be the specific implications of that wrt to particle physics? Since there is no data on such a thing, and perhaps no one has ever entertained that thought, AI will be of no use. It's relatively easy to think of similar situations in any field where solutions require imagining things that have never been imagined.

There's always going to be a material and maufacturing cost associated with robotics, no matter how advanced. I think it will be more reliant on economic changes than technological capability. We wouldn't see humans mixing concrete by hand in half the world given concrete mixers currently exist, if this were the case.

I hope it isn't forever and ever though!

Some would say saturdays...

Robots don’t complain to HR. Robots don’t fail drug and background checks. Robots don’t ask for raises or start drama with their coworkers. Robots will work 24/7 without complaint and if they get damaged won’t file a workman’s compensation claim.

Given the choice most companies would switch to robots due to these reasons alone.

They can do an equivalent job, but not the same job

How about a psychiatrist or anyone that uses logic heavily and analytically? Or a creative writer on a new, obscure topic or fiction for which there is little knowledge base that the machine can be programmed with or aquire data on?

AI is falling short of the expectations of it's creators. I believe it is because it is not capable of original thought and can only emulate human intelligence in a manner that draws on the source but can never transcend it and conceive of truly new and unique ideas.

Put simply, a machine can never have its own mind, or a soul.

Just like they've switched to mechanical concrete mixers across the world due to those advantages and you could never find it mixed by hand if you looked :)

People are cheap in much of the world. I don't like it, but its how it is

That's a technicality.

And there are not nearly as many people mixing concrete by hand today as there were before the invention of the mechanical concrete mixer.

Sure not every instance of manual labor will go to robots for example when the job is too small to bother with just like someone might mix up concrete by hand for a small batch that is not worth renting a mechanical mixer.

But also, just like I can rent a concrete mixer from Home Depot for the weekend we will probably be able rent robots for the weekend too.

Personally I don’t look forward to the day when I am competing with 100 other people for the job of mixing up one bag of concrete because it’s not worth renting a robot to do it. Doing back breaking labor for Pennies because I am competing against robots and a ton of other people out of work.

We are easily replaceable in everything except as parents.

Oh ya I'm just saying the pace will largely be dictated by economics, not just technical feasability.

I picked concrete mixers because machines are great at it, and yet it's still done by hand in much of the developing world because the economic situation hasn't caught up. Human labor is cheap is what I meant by people are cheap, sorry if that was confusing

I know a lot of people that really don't have the skills to make handcrafted items, so might they in reality be undercover robots?! Will prick them tomorrow and see if they bleed hydraulic fluid.... =)

I think therapists will quickly disappear because it will be easy to create a human facsimile that can talk to you as if you were video chatting a real person. And, the facsimile can respond to you with empathetic expressions and tone that will make the experience feel warmer and more comfortable than a real person. Not to mention cheaper and always available.

You describe exactly the jobs an AI would be superior at. Logic and analysis are things humans are not the best at, we have flawed memories, incomplete info, and emotions cause us to behave irrationally. I would much rather go to an AI doctor that has the entire world’s knowledge at its disposal, it would be the most knowledgeable and rational doctor one could imagine.

As far as fiction, the rudimentary ChatGPT is already capable of creating fiction on demand today and that level is going to look like tinker toys compared to what will be available in a few years.

Biologically yes…I would imagine a machine could do much of the parenting role more consistently and effectively than many humans though. Just like really wealthy people pay professionals to help raise their kids, I can imagine a robo nanny doing some of the heavy lifting teaching and raising kids some day.

Brave New World would like a word.

A child raised on breast milk from a machine would probably end up mentally ill. Also would you want a robot whipping your ass when you're late by exactly 3 seconds? Humans need the imperfections of their parents to learn their own.

[removed]

Yeah, 'AI doesn't meet the semantics of having actual meat hands' isn't the argument you're thinking it is, mate.

ESPECIALLY when that argument really ends with 'yet'.

Um, why would you need to raise children, much less have children to raise? Humans are outdated and nothing more than dead weight. The only humans that will exist are those that stay out of the way.

[removed]

But it's still not original thought, nor thought at all but emulation. It can never transcend its inherent limitations which are dictated by the source of its creators. I have no doubt it will progress to the level of godlike power but it's intelligence is still missing something vital to sentience. Something about us that is not quantifiable.

Again, it lacks a soul, life force, whatever you want to call it.

they still havent made a machine that can trim cannabis as neatly as a human.

Nope. It's moot. AI will be authoring the Cambridge Dictionary.

[removed]

[removed]

Well humans are just biomechanical machines, so there's no fundamental difference if job is done by electromechanical machine im the end, if that machine surpasses abilities of the first mentioned.

Also there will be gradual fusing with the between two, before superior one taking over. Just like humans evolved from some kind of fish, things dont stay same forever. This all sensational alarmism, you really have to look up the big picture.

And sex job.

[removed]

Selling blood or plasma.

Expanded: A human being could sell bodily fluids for medical use, which a machine would not be able to do.

Far too complicated sounds like it actually means 'research group hasn't decided to tackle it yet'

Like how hard could it be for a bunch of robotics students to get a couple 6axis arms to work together? Sure maybe you wouldn't have a massive industrialized process, but you could exchange human sweatshop workers with 2 robot arms.

Robots have been surgery workhorses since the early 2000's

https://youtu.be/YVWgRjWfD9k

Imagine being racist against a race we aren't technologically advanced enough to create yet.

We have DNA printers, so producing blood or plasma on demand isn't exactly out of the realm of possibility.

Could it be solved in the future? Perhaps. You never know what future technology can bring. If you talked about carrying a portable touchscreen, Internet enabled computer everywhere 40 years ago, you'd likely have been laughed at, but here we are today.

With today's technology, though, we just can't do it. From the video: "the basic crochet stitch involves 28 movements across 9 axes of motion." The most stitches one robot was able to do in row successfully was 4 and they only completed stitches successfully half the time. Obviously, there's a ton more work that would need to get done before you could have a crochet robot cranking out hats or amigurumi.

That link’s not working for me, but I assume you’re talking about the da Vinci… which is controlled by a surgeon

So... Robots are capable of performing surgery then?

I gave you an upvote for purposely missing the point

I'll choose to not reward you for tripling down

There you go, have another.

How about a little more?

There ya go, buddy.

A therapist. (Your understanding of what therapy actually entails and how it actually works is lacking).

Unless we reach some sort of plateau on AI capabilities, there are zero jobs that are irreplaceable by machines.

In a world where machines reign supreme,

A realm of silicon, circuits, and dreams,

Humanity found solace in games and sport,

A sanctuary where they could cavort.

The bots took charge, our labor relieved,

Free to explore, imagine, achieve,

In battles of wits, strength, and skill,

A spirited contest, a test of will.

E-sports arenas and stadiums grand,

The echoes of cheers across the land,

In pixel realms, on fields of green,

The human spirit, fierce and keen.

A dance of fingers, a clash of might,

As AI watched with sheer delight,

Through games and sports, we found our place,

A bond unbroken, the human race.

Did an ai write this?

The link is indeed a Da Vinci.

The day robots start doing surgery is the day we stop learning new techniques and surgeries imo. Neuro is still guessing half the time.

I just got a job as a behavior technician, interacting with autistic children in a humanizing way isn’t something a machine can do

The obvious answer is none. We just might not get to that point cause humans tend to make things imperfectly.

[removed]

It doesn't matter, because the definition is universal, not depending on dictionaries.

If somebody wants to buy a specific human made item, he or she wouldn't be satisfied by a perfect machine made replica, right? For example, if I want an original Salvador Dali painting on my wall, I won't buy a replica, however perfect it is, and however it seems to be a mere semantic question.

[removed]

Nope. There is nothing intrinsic about a definition.

Yes, there is. Even if you alter the definition, the same time it splits into two concepts. If you change the meaning of "handcrafted" into something like "created randomly either by machines or humans", you just create an other concept. So, now you have a category of "handcrafted items" which has two subcategories: machine made and man made. The latter obviously can't be produced by machines.

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat this action, because every time a new definition will be born. It's not possible to erase a concept from existence, therefor there will always be stuffs which, by definition, can't be made by machines.

yes ^^ gpt4

I’ve seen a lot of people say automation will replace writers, but I think creative nonfiction as a genre is safe. There will always be demand for memoirs, testimonials, and stand up comedy, which are all focused on what individuals observe in day to day life.

I think a lot of pulpy genre fiction will be replaced by AI generated work because such work depends so much on formula. More “serious” literature—the kind of fiction and essays produced by the Albert Camuses, cormac McCarthys, and Gabriel Garcia Marquezs of the world—won’t be supplanted by AI generated texts because so much of it is personal, and so much of the discussion around their works analyzes their psychology.

I’d rather read a literary novel about a kid growing up in 2000s American suburbia by someone who actually experienced it than an AI.

Which isn’t to say that AI generated serious “literature” would suck, just that humans will always want to hear other humans’ takes on what it means to be human.

'In the future' meaning whenever a robotics student decides to make it happen for whatever project. We've had robots that are more than capable of that kind of complex motion for a long time now.

Like sure it's not gonna be an industrialized machine making fabrics faster than a human feasibly ever could, but we have robots that allow surgeons to perform from across the country, and to perform operations that human hands are just not precise enough for.

My point is that this isn't a technology issue, it's that no one has been bored enough to figure it out yet.

Literally any services... Anything creative or needing a physical presence IRL, is very unlikely.

Robotics groups have tried. So far, they can make a robot do one type of stitch - only it can only do 4 stitches in a row and even then only 50% of the time. Is it solvable? Perhaps, but it's going to require some major leaps forward..

X for Doubt

chatGPT is not at all allowed to give opinion on anything. I'm surprised it was able to spit out that answer...

Can send you the screenshots. It's quite interesting

[removed]

And I'm telling you there's already a point - for some products - where you as a consumer already can't tell the difference and the only difference you're choosing between is what you're told about the product and not the product itself. With continued advancement of AI and robotic manufacturing there will absolutely be a point where being told it's hand-made will be the only way you'd know.

So what are you gonna do when nobody tells you?

And frankly, your example of a Dali painting is a laughably bad example since the art world is absolutely cancerous with fakes that aren't even made with the exactitude robots can achieve. Just by bringing that example up you're abandoning your entire argument, so far as I'm seeing.

"So what are you gonna do when nobody tells you?"

I would ask if it is original or not.

Are you aware that you are apologetic towards criminal behavior? The law must pursue this kind of fraudulent activity and advanced AI will provide a very potent and powerful tool for this. I am absolutely sure there will be AI-powered detectors, which will be able to tell if an item is original or not.